SITA AHUJA Vs. TARUN KUMAR KHARBANDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision-petition is directed against the order dated 12.10.2006, (Annexure P-2), rendered by the Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Faridabad, vide which the application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, for setting aside the ex-parte award dated 03.04.2001, was dismissed.

(2.) KRISHNA Devi and Tarun Kumar Kharbanda, claimants, filed separate claim petitions, under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, against Chhotey Lal and M/s. Ahuja Carriers, for grant of compensation, on account of the injuries, which were suffered by them, in the accident, which took place on 11.02.1996 due to rash or negligent driving of truck bearing registration No. HR-29-C-8054 by Chhotey Lal, driver thereof. The owner of the truck, at the relevant time was, M/s. Ahuja CarrieRs. The respondents in the petitions, did not appear despite due service and were proceeded against ex-parte. Ultimately, an ex-parte Award dated 03.04.2001 was passed, granting compensation in favour of the claimants.

(3.) IN reply to the application, Krishna Devi, pleaded that the petition was not maintainable. It was stated that Sita Ahuja was estopped from filing the petition by her own act and conduct. It was stated that M/s. Ahuja Carriers was under the proprietorship of Sh. Sanjeev Ahuja alias Sanjay Ahuja, whereas Smt. Sita Ahuja, mother of Sanjay Ahuja, was brought in picture, just with a view to avoid the payment of compensation, awarded by the Tribunal. It was further stated that summons were sent to M/s. Ahuja Carriers, 2008, Bank Street, Karol Bagh, New Delhi through Sanjiv Ahuja @ Sanjay Ahuja, being the owner of the offending vehicle, but he refused to accept the same. Accordingly, the service was effected by affixation at the gate of the residential premises of Sanjay Ahuja. It was further stated that the Tribunal also directed to effect the service of respondent No. 2, in the main petition in newspaper "Rashtriya Sahara". It was further stated that despite publication in the newspaper, M/s. Ahuja Carriers, respondent No. 2, remained absent. It was further stated that M/s. Ahuja Carriers was having knowledge of the pendency of the main petition prior to 23.10.2002, as Sanjiv Ahuja alias Sanjay Ahuja got released the offending vehicle on superdari as ordered by the Court. It was further stated that in that application, Sanjiv Ahuja alias Sanjay Ahuja, claimed himself to be the owner of the offending vehicle. He further submitted that Sita Ahuja was having due knowledge of the pendency of the main petition, being the mother of Sanjiv Ahuja alias Sanjay Ahuja. Accordingly, a prayer for dismissal of the petition, was made.